Isobel Callaghan faces struggles with personal identity whilst living in a patriarchal society of the 1950’s. Amy Witting endeavours into Isobel’s traumatic childhood that branches into her adulthood, exploring her mother’s sadistic mind games in which she implements on Isobel and the transitioning of Isobel’s childhood defence mechanism into her adult life. Through the revelation of Isobel’s true calling to be a writer, she reflects and accepts her harrowing past. Isobel’s mother discourages Isobel’s imaginative and creative flare throughout the novel I for Isobel, Isobel begins to believe all she does is erroneous causing her to restrict her own creativity. Isobel protects herself from her mother’s disapprovals by adopting a form of protection, …show more content…
Mrs Callaghan discourages and harnesses Isobel’s creativity by saying things such as “you are not to take grown-up books without permission”. Although this may seem like an act of a responsible parent, this is the masked version of the cold-hearted torment Isobel deals with and a complete front put on for the dinner guest. Witting’s intention is to demonstrate Mrs Callaghan’s manipulation on Isobel and how she twists ‘the rules’ constantly. Witting ironically features that the very book Mrs Callaghan is rebuking Isobel for is ‘Sherlock Holmes: The Case of Identity’. The significance of this feature is that the book is a literary allusion and clearly symbolises Isobel’s identity and her mother is interrupting her from revealing its true form. Mrs Callaghan's wicked manipulation continues throughout I for Isobel, Isobel sees a fireball but her mother quickly remarks ‘thought you saw’ and adds ‘you don't know whether you’re telling the truth’, distinctively labelling Isobel as a liar. Isobel begins to believe Mrs Callaghan and accepts herself as ‘a hopeless born liar’. Witting intends to show a clear division of when Isobel begins to lose trust for herself, this being paired with her already existing distrust for others, all this caused by her mother’s callous mistreatment. Isobel protects herself from her mother’s manipulative words by adopting a state of …show more content…
Isobel’s mother is the most predominant reason for Isobel’s past being traumatic. Isobel adopts a protective guard recognised as walls, along her journey the walls are shaken causing curiosity and encouraging her to explore her distressing past. The book The Words Of The Saints triggers a curiosity in Isobel prompting a visit to her old, where she finds the connection between her emotions and the book. Running into Mrs Adams in her visit she is confronted with the revelation of her true identity as a
Everyone has once been someone that they aren’t necessarily ashamed of, but something they aren’t anymore. When you’re in school, everyone is different; between the popular kids, the jocks, the cheerleader, the dorks, the Goths, and all the other “types” of people. In “Her Kind,” Anne Sexton shows that she has been a lot of different women, and she is not them now. In this paper we will be diving into the meanings behind the displaced “I,” the tone and reparation, and who Anne Sexton really is and how that affects what she is trying to let people see through this poem.
Christina, though also losing her feminine figure, proves to be the strength against the patriarchy. For instance, Christina tries to disguise herself by dressing like a man and running away from her husband. In doing this, she stands up for herself and for the woman that she is, saying to her conscious that is controlled by patriarchal thought, “And making herself known by raising her finger…’Why delay, fugitive? Why do you respect your feminine sex? Put on manly courage and mount the horse like a man’. At this she put aside her fears” (Petroff 146). This is not to say that Christina wishes she were a man, but rather she is saying that women should respect and believe in themselves.
A common feature of Arthur Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes stories is mistaken identity. Holmes frequently assumes a different identity to achieve his goals as a detective while investigating his various mysteries. Holmes has the ability to transform and renegotiate his identity to serve a particular purpose. In “A Scandal in Bohemia”, Irene Adler, as an actress, is capable of this shape shifting as well. In this story, Holmes is hired to recover some criminating letter and photos of Irene Adler and the King of Bohemia, who is fearful that his fiancé will learn of his impropriety. During his investigation Holmes follows Alder disguised as a drunken man, and later disguises himself as a clergyman. Holmes’ identity is often manipulated by him, but his position as they skilled detective is never lost. Unknown to Holmes, Alder also disguised herself as a young man. At the conclusion, Adler leaves behind a letter addressed to Holmes explaining how she has bested Holmes. In her letter, she...
Written sometime in the decade from 450-460BC, the Oresteia, along with much other Greek tragedy, coincides with a time of great success for Athenian democracy. As such, it is not unreasonable to assume that the portrayal of democracy in the Oresteia was intended as a charter myth to validate the power structure in place at the time, and to give democracy a seal of approval from a dramatic perspective. Despite the prominence of the goddess Athena, the Oresteia is additionally heavily patriarchal in its message. There is some evidence that supports the view that Athenian democracy was not at its root patriarchal, however, the Oresteia can easily be said to be essentially a charter myth for Athenian democracy and patriarchy.
The rich and celebrated Birling family are spending a happy evening together celebrating the engagement of Sheila Birling to Gerald Croft – a marriage that will result in the merging of two successful local businesses. Yet, just when everything seems to be going so well, they receive a surprise visit from an Inspector Goole who is investigating the suicide of a young girl. He questions each one of the family members and future family members in turn about the suicide of Eva Smith, and as the play unravels it becomes evident that each member of the family has been intertwined with her life. J.B Priestly uses his play ‘An Inspector Calls’ as a way of getting across his socio-political views. He believed that people of different classes were being treated completely oppositely and demanded that something should be done.
When Sheila begins to challenge the authority of her parents by agreeing with the beliefs of the Inspector, she is referred to as “hysterical”. This trope characterised women as less rational, disciplined, and emotionally stable than men. As a result female characters were coddled and their opinions were undervalued. This can be seen in ‘An Inspector Calls’, as it is used as a form of dismissal. Whenever Sheila is trying to state a point that is against the older generation’s ideology, they ridicule it by linking it with (what was thought to be) a psychiatric illness. This shows that Mr. and Mrs. Birling think that ideas not the same as theirs are literally insane.
In the play “An inspector calls” by J.B priestly, Mr Birling and Shelia Birling have contrasting attitudes to social issues. The author uses this to difference to highlight the diversity between generations and their reaction to situations faced. Arthur Birling is the father to Shelia Birling and is presented as the old fashion generation whereas Shelia is the young generation, who is more aware of the responsibility she has towards other people.The play begins with Mr birling and his family celebrating the engagement of Shelia and Gerald. The atmosphere is happy and light-hearted. Before the inspector arrives, Mr Birling is happy with life and himself “It’s one of the happiest nights of my life.” This shows that Mr Birling is quire selfish because he only thinks that it is one of the happiest nights of his life and not of Shelia and Gerald.
A person 's beginnings do not completely define a person, but it does serve as a permanent foundation from which their identity is built around. As children, we absorb every sight and experience like porous sponges. Family, religion, environment, culture -- all of these aspects slowly form the background of one 's identity. As an Asian American, this identity is very different from that of a native Chinese woman 's, for I have parts of both cultures within me. It is a unique identity which I believes acts as a double edged sword. Being born into two cultures is a wonderful in that one can be a part of two cultures, but it is also a very confusing to be "divided" between two very different cultures.
In the essay "It’s Hard Enough Being Me," Anna Lisa Raya relates her experiences as a multicultural American at Columbia University in New York and the confusion she felt about her identity. She grew up in L.A. and mostly identified with her Mexican background, but occasionally with her Puerto Rican background as well. Upon arriving to New York however, she discovered that to everyone else, she was considered "Latina." She points out that a typical "Latina" must salsa dance, know Mexican history, and most importantly, speak Spanish. Raya argues that she doesn’t know any of these things, so how could this label apply to her? She’s caught between being a "sell-out" to her heritage, and at the same time a "spic" to Americans. She adds that trying to cope with college life and the confusion of searching for an identity is a burden. Anna Raya closes her essay by presenting a piece of advice she was given on how to deal with her identity. She was told that she should try to satisfy herself and not worry about other people’s opinions. Anna Lisa Raya’s essay is an informative account of life for a multicultural American as well as an important insight into how people of multicultural backgrounds handle the labels that are placed upon them, and the confusion it leads to in the attempt to find an identity. Searching for an identity in a society that seeks to place a label on each individual is a difficult task, especially for people of multicultural ancestry.
She hides her actions and attempt to justify them until she is expose by the letter from the paper regarding her novel entry. She is ignorant to her unrealistic judgements about Cecilia and Robert and attempts to fix the problem when she made it worse. She realizes her mistake when the letter questions the conflict of her novel and she witnesses her attempt to hide the true horror behind her decision. While she attempts at hiding her problem in the draft, she made it more noticeable to the paper and drain the luster of the plot. Her realization of her ignorance honor the lovers’ romance and made her strive to atone her former
The title of Marcel Theroux's second novel is an exquisitely calculated tease; sibling rivalry in high-achieving literary families has been a hot subject since long before William James described Henry as his ''younger and shallower and vainer brother.'' Mycroft Holmes is Sherlock's older, smarter, lazier brother, a shadowy but nonetheless vivid occasional presence in Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's stories. (He has a nebulous but potent role as ''the most indispensable man in the country,'' according to Sherlock. Among the only things that are certain about him, Theroux reminds us, ''are that he is very fat, and a member of the Diogenes Club, where conversation is forbidden.'')
What is personal identity? This question has been asked and debated by philosophers for centuries. The problem of personal identity is determining what conditions and qualities are necessary and sufficient for a person to exist as the same being at one time as another. Some think personal identity is physical, taking a materialistic perspective believing that bodily continuity or physicality is what makes a person a person with the view that even mental things are caused by some kind of physical occurrence. Others take a more idealist approach with the belief that mental continuity is the sole factor in establishing personal identity holding that physical things are just reflections of the mind. One more perspective on personal identity and the one I will attempt to explain and defend in this paper is that personal identity requires both physical and psychological continuity; my argument is as follows:
One of the main issues in “Anna and the King” is the differences between men and women. What is less obvious is that those differences are of two types: the existing inequality of the social status of men and women, and the ways in which men and women try to deal with (end or prolong) this inequality.
A person’s identity is shaped by many different aspects. Family, culture, friends, personal interests and surrounding environments are all factors that tend to help shape a person’s identity. Some factors may have more of an influence than others and some may not have any influence at all. As a person grows up in a family, they are influenced by many aspects of their life. Family and culture may influence a person’s sense of responsibilities, ethics and morals, tastes in music, humor and sports, and many other aspects of life. Friends and surrounding environments may influence a person’s taste in clothing, music, speech, and social activities. Personal interests are what truly set individuals apart. An individual is not a puppet on the string of their puppet-master, nor a chess piece on their master’s game board, individuals choose their own paths in life. They accomplish, or strive to accomplish, goals that they have set for themselves throughout their lifetime. Individuals are different from any other individual in the world because they live their own life rather than following a crowd of puppets. A person’s identity is defined by what shaped it in the first place, why they chose to be who they are, and what makes them different from everybody else in the world. I feel that I have developed most of my identity from my own dreams, fantasies, friends, and idols.
The philosophical problem of personal identity pertains to questions that arise about ourselves by virtue of our being persons. There is no single question that will sum up the problem, but rather a multitude of questions that are loosely connected to each other. Within this essay, the four most prominent problems will be explained and addressed. One of the most familiar is the question of “Who am I?” This regards to what makes one a unique individual. Another familiar question is, “What is it to be a person?” This concerns the necessary criteria for something to count as a person as opposed to a non-person. There is also the problem of persistence, relating to personal identity over time. An example of this would be to glance upon an old photograph of a childhood class, point and say, “That's me.” The questions arises of, “What makes you that one instead of one of the others?” The last problem to be explained is the one of evidence. How do we find out who is who? There are two separate sources of evidence used often in philosophy: first-person memory, pertaining to one remembering an action or event and therefore being the person who did such, and physical continuity, where if the one who performed the action or witnessed the event looks like you, then it is you.